SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 8589

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
C.S. DIAS, J
SIVANKUTTY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl. 5252/2024



Advocates:
S.SHANAVAS KHAN, S.INDU, KALA G.NAMBIAR, ADGP SRI GRASIOUS KURIAKOSE, SR PP SRI C K SURESH

Bail is the rule and jail is the exception, and prolonged incarceration without trial violates the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Headnote:

Bail - Criminal Procedure Code - Section 302 IPC - The court granted bail to the accused, who was in judicial custody for seven months, as the investigation was complete, the final report was filed, and the accused had no criminal antecedents. The court relied on the principles that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, and that prolonged incarceration without trial violates the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Fact of the Case:

The accused was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.12.2023 for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (murder) by stabbing his wife Radhamma (deceased) on 05.12.2023.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the materials placed on record substantiated the accused's involvement in the crime. However, the court also noted that the accused had been in judicial custody for the last seven months, the investigation was complete, the final report was filed, and the accused had no criminal antecedents.

Issues: Whether the accused should be granted bail, considering the principles that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, and that prolonged incarceration without trial violates the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principles established in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, Dataram Singh v. State of U.P., State of Kerala v. Raneef, and Hussainara Khatoon (I) v. Home Secy., State of Bihar, which hold that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, and that prolonged incarceration without trial violates the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Final Decision: The court granted bail to the accused, subject to stringent conditions.

ORDER

The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 , by the sole accused in Crime No.1406/2023 of the Chengannur Police Station, Alappuzha, which is registered against him for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code . The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.12.2023.

2.The essence of the prosecution case is that; on 05.12.2023, at around 15.00 hours, the accused, out of his previous animosity towards her wife named Radhamma (deceased), stabbed her with a knife and committed her murder. Thus, the accused has committed the above offence.

3.Heard; Sri.S. Shanavas Khan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.C.K.Suresh, the learned Special Senior Public Prosecutor.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations levelled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. There is no material to substantiate the petitioner's involvement in the crime. The Investigating Officer has deliberately incorporated Section 302 of the IPC to see that the petitioner is perceptually incarcerated. The petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last seven months, the investigation in the case is complete, the final report has been laid on 01.03.2024, and the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents. Hence, the application may be allowed.

5.The learned Special Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the application. He submitted that the petitioner has committed a heinous crime by murdering his wife. There are incriminating materials to substantiate the petitioner's involvement in the crime. He stated that if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is every likelihood of him intimidating the witnesses and tampering with the evidence. Therefore, the application may be dismissed. However, he did not dispute the fact that the final report was laid on 01.03.2024, and the case is pending in committal proceedings.

6. The prosecution allegation against the petitioner is that, he had murdered his wife on 05.12.2023 by stabbing her with a knife. The materials placed on record substantiate the petitioner's involvement in the crime. Nonetheless, the fact remains that the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last seven months, the investigation in the case is complete, recovery has been effected, and the final report has been laid on 01.03.2024 and the case has been in committal proceedings as C.P.No.23/2024 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Chengannur.

7. In Sanjay Chandra v. CBI , [2012 1 SCC 40] , the Honourable Supreme Court has categorically held that the fundamental postulate of criminal jurisprudence is the presumption of innocence, until a person is found guilty. Any imprisonment prior to conviction is to be considered as punitive and it would be improper on the part of the Court to refuse bail solely on the ground of former conduct.

8. In Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. , [(2018) 3 SCC 22] the Honourable Supreme Court observed that grant of bail is the rule and putting a person in jail is an exception. Even though the grant of bail is entirely the discretion of the court, it has to be evaluated based on the facts and circumstances of each case and the discretion has to be exercised in a judicious and compassionate manner.

9. In State of Kerala v. Raneef , [(2011) 1 SCC 784] , the Honourable Supreme Court has declared that undertrial prisoners detained in jail for indefinite periods, without any sufficient reason or due to the delay in concluding the trial, will tantamount to infringement of their right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

10. In Hussainara Khatoon (I) v. Home Secy., State of Bihar [(1980) 1 SCC 81] , the Honourable Supreme Court while dealing with a case of under trials, who suffered long incarceration, held that the procedure that keeps large number of people behind the bars without

                  Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                  1
                  2
                  3
                  4
                  5
                  6
                  7
                  8
                  9
                  10
                  11
                  SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                  supreme today icon
                  logo-black

                  An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                  Please visit our Training & Support
                  Center or Contact Us for assistance

                  qr

                  Scan Me!

                  India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                  For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                  whatsapp-icon Back to top